Abortion and evil in this green and pleasant land

Below is an article at my place by contributor Amfortas who hails from Tasmania. He says of it: “The issue is more Freedom of Speech attached to a concept of abortion. My intent was to draw attention to the restriction on and punishment of speech. It is in the context of a new law on abortion.”


In this green and pleasant land of Tasmania, run into the ground by feminists, socialists and greenies, it will soon be ILLEGAL to speak out against abortion.

BIG SISTA has spoken.

Whilst what passes for ‘ the thinking public’ has been embroiled in matters of Press Regulation and Freedom of Speech restrictions in Oz (as a lesson taken from the UK), the quiet backwaters have been busy sneaking in draconian ‘part restrictions’ on free speech complete with severe punishment.

“Abortion has effectively been legal in Australian states for more than 40 years, although it has remained in the criminal code. The number of prosecutions in all that time can be counted on one hand. So why the sudden enthusiasm for decriminalization?

“Because the real aim of the Labor-Green coalition which is running Tasmania is to criminalize abortion dissent. With only two weeks for the public to respond, the Health Minister, Michelle O’Byrne, has drafted what may be most draconian abortion law anywhere.

“The neighbouring state of Victoria decriminalized abortion in 2008. Ms O’Byrne says that this is the model for her bill. But the Victorian bill contains no penalties for conscientious objectors; the Tasmanian bill does. The Victorian bill doesn’t mention counsellors; the Tasmanian bill threatens counsellors with jail. The Victorian bill doesn’t mention protests; the Tasmanian bill threatens protesters with jail.”


The penalties proposed are horrendous imposing enormous fines (higher than the national average annual wage) on even disinterested people for ‘failure’ to help procure abortion.

“If this bill passes, a part-time volunteer counsellor for an organization supporting pregnant women could be jailed for a year and fined up to A$65,000 if she refuses to refer a woman to a place where she can get an abortion. The bill’s definition of a counsellor includes anyone who gives ‘advice or information relating to pregnancy options’ and ‘whether or not for fee or reward’. Overnight, all agencies which disagree with abortion will be forced to shut down.

“Medical practitioners will be obliged under threat of a $65,000 fine to make referrals if they have a conscientious objection. To anyone who believes that an unborn child has a right to life making a referral means cooperating with evil. The proposed laws are coercing participation in the overall process of abortion procurement.

“Nurses who refuse to participate in abortions could be fined $65,000. The right to peaceful protest will also be shut down. The bill imposes a 300-metre-wide exclusion zone around abortion clinics. The maximum penalty is 12 months in jail and a $65,000 fine…

“To make matters worse, the prohibited activity includes intimidating, protesting or photographing, and ‘any other prescribed [sic] behaviour’. The sloppy wording, in combination with an open-ended section on regulations, could be used to punish innocent activity.

I know and understand the difficulty many women may have from time to time with their personal attitude toward abortion. I would not be at the head o a queue to throw stones. But this Feminist-led Bill, from the claimed ‘nurturing’ sex, would not just throw stones at anyone speaking out for the silent unborn child, but actually throw their sorry arses in jail and deprive their own children of a parental wage.

Just read the second section again. A person who is asked for a view by a pregnant woman, be they a Qualified Professional ‘counsellor’ or just a family member can be JAILED. The Bill makes no distinction between anyone providing ‘counsel’.

Are feminists mad? It is a legitimate question.

Or just bad? That is a legitimate question too.

5 comments for “Abortion and evil in this green and pleasant land

  1. bunny
    March 12, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    I think the answer to the second question is bad, I do not agree with abortion as a form of contraception for personal reasons, whereas I am not against abortion in all cases. That is my personal opinion, this bill is a stifling of free speech and is wrong on every level. I can just see the witch finders going for counsellors, nurses or just anybody they can to make a sample prosecution.

    These sanctimoneous swine are evil.

  2. Voice of Reason
    March 12, 2013 at 3:23 pm

    I hope that this is just badly written. If that is the case, it might be addressing the issue that we have here in the US, where anti-abortion groups pose as abortion providers. In some cases, it has gone as far as unlawful restraint.

  3. March 12, 2013 at 9:10 pm

    Why does social repression rise in proportion to third world immigration…to forestall an uprising?

  4. amfortas
    March 12, 2013 at 11:37 pm

    In Tasmania we do not have an abortion clinic and I suspect that this bill makes a smooth path for one to be introduced. We used to have one but it closed down from lack of business after Abortion became paid from the public purse through medicare. Abortions are performed in our main public hospital.

    The inclusion of the item about 300 metre exclusion zone around the ‘clinic’ implies a future clinic being established.

    80,000 abortions are performed every year in Australia. That is in a population of 22 million.

    In the Bill, fathers are not mentioned. But imagine if you will a pregnant wife concerned at another mouth to feed or a missed opportunity for ‘career’ progression being told by her husband that they will manage, that he can get a second job etc. HE is liable to be jailed and / or fined more than his annual wage.

    He is ‘counselling’ under the broad definition in the bill. Trying to ensure his own progeny will become fraught with threat.

  5. March 13, 2013 at 8:48 pm

    In a free society, people obey the laws because they think that, all other things being equal, obeying law is a good thing because the lawmaking process is somehow legitimate. A major part of that legitimacy is that, hate some laws as they do, they have the right to agitate to change them via parliament and other political action.
    That in turn requires freedom of expression to take exception to the status quo and to argue for its reform. These communists have asserted that some laws will NEVER be changed because to argue against them is an arrestable offence punishable with jail or one that will bankrupt the average protester.

    Why should Tasmanians obey any of these fascists’ laws? Even one?

Comments are closed.